Re: US POLITICS - National office split
Joseph P McTernan
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: US POLITICS - National office split
Creator:
Joseph P McTernan
Date:
10/19/1999
Text:
I enjoy reading everyone's posts on this board and this is the first time I
have felt the need to share my opinion with the group. I feel that the
three E.D.s. are being slandered unecessarily. I have worked personally
with all three of the E.D.s, and I have always experienced a tremendous
amount of communication and cooperation between Lance Hoxie, Bob Van Hook,
and Tom Gorski. These three men are charged with operating three separate
organizations housed in a single office with a shared resource (the national
office). Based on my personal experience working with all three of them, I
feel they should be commended for their lack of individual ego rather than
slandered for unsubstantiated perceptions. How many people do you know that
would place their job in jeopardy by backing a consolidation proposal that
would surely eliminate two of the three positions. The fact that
consolidation failed does not take away from the good intentions of the
three executive directors.
Just one man's thoughts. Take them for what they are worth.
Joe McTernan
-----Original Message-----
From: <Email Address Redacted> [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 10:36 AM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: US POLITICS - National office split
I am not one of the insiders at the national office. I can certainly
understand the scenario that Mr. Lunsford has put forth. I am a rank and
file
member of the profession, and a dues paying member of all 3 national groups.
I feel that each paid executive has a right to be proud of the work they do,
and the group they individually represent. That same independence or ego
that Mr. Lunsford describes, will work in each organizations benefit when
they work independently of each other. The way I see it, let them compete,
let them have issues of difference, let them have issues in common, but let
them stand for individual sector of the industry they represent.
It reminds me of the joke about the brain, the heart and the A-hole, (I
think
we have all heard that one), the point is, that they are each important.
They
each have their respective place in this industry body!
This is long overdue....
Question to anyone: if the ego's were so lofty and combative, than why did
they push to consolidate? If consolidation had passed, who would have won
the
ego battle and been left in charge? was there a winner take all mentality
in our individual executives or would the ego's have been appeased, and a
new
friendly atmosphere been created? I don't know if anyone has a definitive
answer on these questions, but it is my feeling that two of the three would
have walked. If that happened, we, as an industry, would be left with one
really big ego, industry and profession in hand. That would be a very bad
situation for most of us.
Sincerely,
Wade Bader, LPO
Tampa, FL
have felt the need to share my opinion with the group. I feel that the
three E.D.s. are being slandered unecessarily. I have worked personally
with all three of the E.D.s, and I have always experienced a tremendous
amount of communication and cooperation between Lance Hoxie, Bob Van Hook,
and Tom Gorski. These three men are charged with operating three separate
organizations housed in a single office with a shared resource (the national
office). Based on my personal experience working with all three of them, I
feel they should be commended for their lack of individual ego rather than
slandered for unsubstantiated perceptions. How many people do you know that
would place their job in jeopardy by backing a consolidation proposal that
would surely eliminate two of the three positions. The fact that
consolidation failed does not take away from the good intentions of the
three executive directors.
Just one man's thoughts. Take them for what they are worth.
Joe McTernan
-----Original Message-----
From: <Email Address Redacted> [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 10:36 AM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: US POLITICS - National office split
I am not one of the insiders at the national office. I can certainly
understand the scenario that Mr. Lunsford has put forth. I am a rank and
file
member of the profession, and a dues paying member of all 3 national groups.
I feel that each paid executive has a right to be proud of the work they do,
and the group they individually represent. That same independence or ego
that Mr. Lunsford describes, will work in each organizations benefit when
they work independently of each other. The way I see it, let them compete,
let them have issues of difference, let them have issues in common, but let
them stand for individual sector of the industry they represent.
It reminds me of the joke about the brain, the heart and the A-hole, (I
think
we have all heard that one), the point is, that they are each important.
They
each have their respective place in this industry body!
This is long overdue....
Question to anyone: if the ego's were so lofty and combative, than why did
they push to consolidate? If consolidation had passed, who would have won
the
ego battle and been left in charge? was there a winner take all mentality
in our individual executives or would the ego's have been appeased, and a
new
friendly atmosphere been created? I don't know if anyone has a definitive
answer on these questions, but it is my feeling that two of the three would
have walked. If that happened, we, as an industry, would be left with one
really big ego, industry and profession in hand. That would be a very bad
situation for most of us.
Sincerely,
Wade Bader, LPO
Tampa, FL
Citation
Joseph P McTernan, “Re: US POLITICS - National office split,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 6, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213067.
